Romeo and Juliet 2013

Bilge Ebiri, New York Magazine/Vulture: Juliet should be a girl, but the story's trajectory of self-sacrifice requires her to become a woman. Steinfeld gets the girl part exactly right, but she botches the transformation. Read more

Sara Stewart, New York Post: Seventh-grade English teachers, rejoice. You have a new movie to show the class that day you come in hung over and can't deal. Read more

Soren Anderson, Seattle Times: Verona, we have a problem. And thy name is Juliet. Read more

Justin Chang, Variety: A desultory new version of Shakespeare's tragedy that feels shorn of eroticism, intensity or purpose. Read more

Ignatiy Vishnevetsky, AV Club: Actors in tights declaim in bloodless BBC accents while someone murders a piano's sustain pedal on the soundtrack. Read more

Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic: Steinfeld is 16, which sounds young but is about right for Juliet. Booth is 21, handsome as can be, but also a strong Romeo. They don't exactly ignite the screen with passion, but their chemistry is good. Read more

Jake Coyle, Associated Press: Pretty on the outside but lacking something more than a menagerie of lush brunette heads. Read more

Ty Burr, Boston Globe: An interminable, unintentionally hilarious misfire, apparently aimed at a youth audience weaned on "Gossip Girl." Read more

Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune: The most excellent and lamentable tragedy "Romeo and Juliet" has been turned into a film that is lamentable without the "excellent" part. Read more

Peter Rainer, Christian Science Monitor: What can you say about a Romeo and Juliet that lacks heat, romance, eroticism, or lyricism? Mercifully, not much. Read more

Kate Erbland, Film.com: Fellowes' many changes and additions diminish the power of Shakespeare's story. Read more

Todd McCarthy, Hollywood Reporter: The grown-ups outshine the kids in this handsome, romantically anemic rendering of Shakespeare's perennial. Read more

Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times: So reverential is this play of the play, the Bard would likely blush. Read more

Connie Ogle, Miami Herald: [Director Carlo] Carlei's film is not particularly imaginative in terms of context, but it offers proof that this material never tarnishes, that with the right sort of movie magic, even a traditional telling can be thrilling. Read more

John Anderson, Newsday: The lovers provide no palpable passion. And without that, there is very much woe. But not much point. Read more

Stephen Whitty, Newark Star-Ledger: If you really love this story, go see the Franco Zeffirelli version (or a good production of "West Side Story"). And if you truly love Shakespeare, read any of a dozen of his other plays instead. Read more

Elizabeth Weitzman, New York Daily News: Starter Shakespeare for the "Twilight" generation. Read more

Manohla Dargis, New York Times: A sufficiently entertaining, adamantly old-fashioned adaptation that follows the play's general outline without ever rising to the passionate intensity of its star-cross'd crazy kids. Read more

Michael Sragow, Orange County Register: This is the Teen Vogue version of the ultimate young love story. Read more

Steven Rea, Philadelphia Inquirer: It makes Baz Luhrmann's 1996 contempo update - the one with Claire Danes and Leonardo DiCaprio and the plus-sign in its title - look like some kind of masterpiece. Read more

James Berardinelli, ReelViews: In a way, it's like the cover of a favorite pop tune - inferior, to be sure, but nevertheless pleasantly familiar. Read more

Andrew O'Hehir, Salon.com: "Romeo and Juliet" is too soapy and improbable to count among the Bard's very best plays, but it surely has some of his best dialogue, and messing it up this much is close to inexcusable. Read more

Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: Viewers who go into "Romeo and Juliet" cold may be forgiven for coming away thinking Shakespeare was a really lousy writer. Read more

Dana Stevens, Slate: There are reasons to see this Romeo and Juliet-it's just a shame that Romeo and Juliet are not chief among them. Read more

Joe Williams, St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Shakespeare's play evokes the poetry of undying love, but this "Romeo and Juliet" is prosaic. Read more

Liam Lacey, Globe and Mail: Here's betting the new film version of Romeo and Juliet probably won't inspire a new generation's passion for Shakespeare. Read more

Richard Ouzounian, Toronto Star: Douglas Booth is a handsome fellow, in a mushy-peas kind of way, but Hailee Steinfeld, Oscar-nominated for True Grit, neither looks appealing nor acts with any distinction here. Read more

Todd Gilchrist, TheWrap: Elegant and well-acted but bereft of the spark to make its tragedy resonate with lovers who spent more than an hour getting to know one another, "Romeo and Juliet" effectively chronicles young love but doesn't transcend it. Read more

Joshua Rothkopf, Time Out: Today's version will likely become a cheat sheet for slacking students, but it won't inspire them to open their hearts to the text. Read more

Claudia Puig, USA Today: While there is a pleasantness about this faithful Shakespearean reboot, there also is some woeful miscasting and a lukewarm feeling about the straightforward production. Read more

Stephanie Merry, Washington Post: If there is one novelty in director Carlo Carlei's take on the world's best-known ill-fated lovers, it's that the words aren't entirely Shakespeare's. It's a fresh approach, indeed, but maybe not the wisest. Read more